Aas Mohammad vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Mr. Alok Verma, J. - This application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed for quashment of criminal proceedings pending in Criminal Case No.609/2016 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Agar.

The relevant facts are that Police Station-Agar seized a truck bearing registration No.RJ-02-GA-8427 with bottles of Tuborg strong beer loaded in the truck amounting to 8580 bulk liters and valuing to Rs.3,23,075.89. An offence was registered under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act by the Police Station-Agar on 11.05.2016.

According to prosecution story, the truck was carrying Tuborg strong premium beer and the beer was being transported under a valid permit issued by Excise Department of State of Rajasthan. The permit also provides the route which was via Ujjain and the consignment was meant for Carlsberg India Private Ltd., Indore, Dewas Naka opposite Lasodia Police Station. The permit was valid only upto 10.05.2016, however, on 11.05.2016 when the truck was seized, it was found that the permit was already expired a day before. The liquor was a duty paid liquor and was being transported under a valid permit dated 09.05.2016. However, when the vehicle was seized, the permit had already expired.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the applicant on the ground that according to provisions of Section 61 of M.P. Excise Act, 1915, a cognizance by a Magistrate can only be taken on a complaint by the Collector or Excise Officer not below the rank of District Excise Officer as may be authorised by the Collector in this behalf. According to counsel for the applicant, the complaint was not filed by the Collector or District Excise Officer, who was specifically authorised for this behalf by the Collector, and therefore, the Magistrate was not competent to take cognizance in this case.

The Section 61 of M.P. Excise Act as substituted by M.P. Act No.23 of 1979 provides as under :-

"61. Limitation of prosecutions. - (1) No court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable:-

(a) under [Section 34 for contravention of any condition of a license, permit or pass granted under this Act, Section 37], Section 38, Section 38- A, Section 39, except on a complaint or report of the Collector or an Excise Officer not below the rank of District Excise Officer as may be authorised by the Collector in this behalf;

(b) under any other section of this Act other than Section 49 except on the compliant or report of an excise Officer or Police officer.]

(2) Except with the special sanction of the State Government no Judicial Magistrate shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act, or any rule or order thereunder, unless the prosecution is instituted within six months from the date on which the offence is alleged to have been committed".

It is apparent that the present case is of breach of condition of permit the consignment should reach its destination before 10.05.2016, however, it could not reach its destination and the vehicle was searched and seized on 11.05.2016. The consignment was duty paid, and therefore, the only criminal act on part of the present applicant was that he was found with expired permit when the vehicle was searched and seized.

Under these circumstances, it was necessary to follow the provisions of Section 61 of M.P. Excise Act, such provisions were not followed, and therefore, the proceedings before the learned Judicial Magistrate are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, this application is allowed. The proceedings pending before the Magistrate are quashed.

The applicant is discharged from offence under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act.

With aforesaid observations and directions, this application stands disposed of. Certified copy, as per rules.